The Laws of Moses or the Torah Laws are found mostly in the first five books of the Old Testament. Laws like: it's a sin to eat shellfish (Leviticus 11:12,Deuteronomy 14:10); or an uncircumcised Kohen must not eat Terumah (Exodus 12:48). There are many more examples and even the Jews admit these laws do not apply anymore. The Jews claim that since the destruction of the second Temple, many of the laws have gone away (their words (Jews) not mine). But yet atheists continue to “beat the dead horse” claiming that the Bible is NOT true and there is NO God and cite these outdated laws as a source of reference. Why?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_Mitzvothttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_Commandments

You can't have the NT without the OT. You can't have it both ways. If a Christian is willing to throw out old OT laws, how are we to determine exactly which ones are no longer valid? I can't disprove YHWH using the OT as a source, because it's a just a book full of stories. But those stories are mostly pathetic when attached to a supreme creator of the universe with attributes of multi-omniness.

Can we ignore the world-wide flood story? What about Jonah living in the whale/fish for three days and surviving? Are you OK with Joshua's army slaughtering entire towns of women, children, and animals because YHWH commanded it in the OT? I could go on and on, so I have no idea why you would isolate some dumb laws. Do you remember which book in the OT outlined the rules for pooping in the camp before a battle?

Geez...you'd think modern Christians could find better ways to spend their time defending their myths.

You can't have the NT without the OT. You can't have it both ways. If a Christian is willing to throw out old OT laws, how are we to determine exactly which ones are no longer valid? I can't disprove YHWH using the OT as a source, because it's a just a book full of stories. But those stories are mostly pathetic when attached to a supreme creator of the universe with attributes of multi-omniness.

Can we ignore the world-wide flood story? What about Jonah living in the whale/fish for three days and surviving? Are you OK with Joshua's army slaughtering entire towns of women, children, and animals because YHWH commanded it in the OT? I could go on and on, so I have no idea why you would isolate some dumb laws. Do you remember which book in the OT outlined the rules for pooping in the camp before a battle?

Geez...you'd think modern Christians could find better ways to spend their time defending their myths.

Why do you atheists make up your own rules when it comes to debate? I just gave you two clear references why the Torah Laws are not in effect. Then you say, yes they are, because you cant have one without the other. Then, you change the question by asking about Noah.The question on the table is: Why do atheists continue to use these outdated references to attempt to disprove the Bible?

Not only atheists but any other reasonably intelligent person would have difficulty with your question as it makes an assumption that is not universally true. Yes there are some Jews who will eat Shellfish, pork, etc, but there are many who do not.

Pleases refer yourself to http://www.jewfaq.org/kashrut.htm After you have read that, you will see that your next post should be: "I apologisze for misleading you when I said, "even the Jews admit these laws do not apply anymore.", when it is clear that Jews do not say this although some of them do not take too much notice of them."

At this stage we will know that you have done some research, albeit too late.

I hope this helps.

Logged

Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

The Laws of Moses or the Torah Laws are found mostly in the first five books of the Old Testament. Laws like: it's a sin to eat shellfish (Leviticus 11:12,Deuteronomy 14:10); or an uncircumcised Kohen must not eat Terumah (Exodus 12:48). There are many more examples and even the Jews admit these laws do not apply anymore. The Jews claim that since the destruction of the second Temple, many of the laws have gone away (their words (Jews) not mine). But yet atheists continue to “beat the dead horse” claiming that the Bible is NOT true and there is NO God and cite these outdated laws as a source of reference. Why?

Sounds like you're saying that the laws in the bible--laws that, mind you, supposely were dictated by god-- are subjective.

You might want to have a little talk with mhaberling and other christains that subscribes to the "objective morality" arguement...

even the Jews admit these laws do not apply anymore. The Jews claim that since the destruction of the second Temple, many of the laws have gone away (their words (Jews) not mine).

That is completely untrue. For orthodox jews, all the laws still apply. They do not stone people to death for breaking the laws because there is no king, no high priest and there are no judges who are authorized to determine guilt. If they had them, you can be sure they would be stoning harlots by the dozen.

Similarly, they do not sacrifice animals anymore because the temple in jerusalem has been demolished for about 2000 years. Not because they don't need to sacrifice animals.

Your links do nothing for your argument. You should read them before posting them.

My point once again is that Christians do not live nor follow those laws that many atheists keep referring to. Many Jews do not follow those laws today either, and my references show that the Jewish faith claims that many of them are outdated and do not apply as well. This is the point I am trying to make.

Greybeard,Let's take your argument. According to the article you provided:According to the 2000 National Jewish Population Survey (NJPS), 21% of American Jews report that they keep kosher in the home.

That being said, what does 21% of the Jewish population eating kosher foods have to do with Jesus? Christianity? Jesus rising from the dead? I believe this is the point I was trying to make.

Jesus was a Jew and I would expect that he require his followers to be faithful to the Jewish doctorines. Christianity has really nothing to do with Jesus,as it was "invented" long after his "death"

Since you atheists are into proving what you say. Please give proof that Christianity was "invented" long after Jesus death. Secondly, how much sense does it make that Jesus required his followers to be faithful to the Jewish doctrine?

|Firstly, this site is a combined effort, secondly, 12 monkeys is not barred from answering, thirdly, I have not answered for him, fourthly you seem to be making inaccurate claims.

As you seem careless as to what you mean, you ask "Please give proof that Christianity was "invented" long after Jesus death." just so that we do not get confused about what you mean by "long after Jesus's death." when do you say that Christianity was invented/started?

|Firstly, this site is a combined effort, secondly, 12 monkeys is not barred from answering, thirdly, I have not answered for him, fourthly you seem to be making inaccurate claims.

As you seem careless as to what you mean, you ask "Please give proof that Christianity was "invented" long after Jesus death." just so that we do not get confused about what you mean by "long after Jesus's death." when do you say that Christianity was invented/started?

Graybeard,Here is 12monkey's post: "Jesus was a Jew and I would expect that he require his followers to be faithful to the Jewish doctorines. Christianity has really nothing to do with Jesus,as it was "invented" long after his 'death'."

How am I careless to ask 12moneys to clarify or prove the statement? Am I misinterpreting the statement in referring to Christianity as "invented long after his death?"

How am I careless to ask 12moneys to clarify or prove the statement? Am I misinterpreting the statement in referring to Christianity as "invented long after his death?"

I have no idea how you are interpreting the statement, that is why I asked you to clarify. It would be helpful for you to state when Christianity started. If, for example you say, "After Paul's Letters" then we have an idea. This may be what 12 Monkeys means. If you mean the Council of Nicaea, then this too could coincide with 12 Monkeys claim.

It would thus be helpful to know when you think Christianity started. Of course, it could be you have never thought of the question before.

Logged

Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

How am I careless to ask 12moneys to clarify or prove the statement? Am I misinterpreting the statement in referring to Christianity as "invented long after his death?"

I have no idea how you are interpreting the statement, that is why I asked you to clarify. It would be helpful for you to state when Christianity started. If, for example you say, "After Paul's Letters" then we have an idea. This may be what 12 Monkeys means. If you mean the Council of Nicaea, then this too could coincide with 12 Monkeys claim.

It would thus be helpful to know when you think Christianity started. Of course, it could be you have never thought of the question before.

Graybeard,Please. I am not the one making the statement. Isn't it your opinion that the one making the claim must provide the proof? Do you see why I call atheists hypocrites?

My point once again is that Christians do not live nor follow those laws that many atheists keep referring to. Many Jews do not follow those laws today either, and my references show that the Jewish faith claims that many of them are outdated and do not apply as well. This is the point I am trying to make.

Maybe you should take this up with the Christians who cite Leviticus in defense of their homophobic bigotry, or the ones who want to push their OT-based creationism into the public schools in place of science. Maybe you don't incorporate OT teachings into your version of Christianity the way that many other Christians do, but the world does not revolve around you.

But yet atheists continue to “beat the dead horse” claiming that the Bible is NOT true and there is NO God and cite these outdated laws as a source of reference. Why?

The objection that atheists most frequently raise in regard to the OT has little to do with trying to prove that there's no god. More often it is countering Christian claims of moral superiority and moral absolutism, despite the obvious hypocrisy of ignoring the inconvenient bits of their own Holy book's teaching, and claiming that some of those moral absolutes don't apply anymore.

Do you mean the same Book of Leviticus that christians today use to prove that God thinks homosexuality is a horrible, awful, icky thing? If so, why do you guys get to use it and then complain about us using it at the same time?

I'm of course referring to this old standard that gets repeated time and time again by religious conservatives:

"If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination." (Leviticus 20:13).

Do you mean the same Book of Leviticus that christians today use to prove that God thinks homosexuality is a horrible, awful, icky thing? If so, why do you guys get to use it and then complain about us using it at the same time?

I'm of course referring to this old standard that gets repeated time and time again by religious conservatives:

"If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination." (Leviticus 20:13).

My point once again is that Christians do not live nor follow those laws that many atheists keep referring to. Many Jews do not follow those laws today either, and my references show that the Jewish faith claims that many of them are outdated and do not apply as well. This is the point I am trying to make.

There's a couple of things I want to ask, just so we're all clear on this.

1) Do you believe that god himself dictated all those old testament laws? (mind you, the bible does say that he did)

2) Either way, doesn't that mean the bible spends a significant chunk of itself dealing with subjective morality, rather than "objective morality", as many believers like to claim?

At any rate, I can't imagine it sits well with you that the bible wastes so much time on things that are now considered nonsense, even by believers.

My point once again is that Christians do not live nor follow those laws that many atheists keep referring to. Many Jews do not follow those laws today either, and my references show that the Jewish faith claims that many of them are outdated and do not apply as well. This is the point I am trying to make.

There's a couple of things I want to ask, just so we're all clear on this.

1) Do you believe that god himself dictated all those old testament laws? (mind you, the bible does say that he did)

2) Either way, doesn't that mean the bible spends a significant chunk of itself dealing with subjective morality, rather than "objective morality", as many believers like to claim?

At any rate, I can't imagine it sits well with you that the bible wastes so much time on things that are now considered nonsense, even by believers.

1. Christians are not Jews. If the Jews want to believe God dictated those laws to them, more power to em. It's hard to believe in this day and age, but most of them are common sense laws- for the day. Not our day. We have many ridiculous laws in America. I'm sure at one time you have looked them up. Do a Google search for ridiculous laws, you will find a bunch of antiquated laws that are funny now. 2. I believe morality is between you and God. There are many things in the Bible that are considered sin. But in the end, everyone is a sinner and will be judged.3. I would not say the Bible wasted anytime, and I don't consider them nonsense. Those Mosaic Laws were beneficial back then.